Grenfell Tower fire in North Kensington - news and discussion

[Pickman's model]

As I suspected: uncritical reading of sensationalist articles by crap journalists.

They claim that the fact that the appearance of the block from surrounding areas was mentioned in the planning report is somehow significant.

Ever single planning report for every single planning application assesses the visual impact of a development on the surrounding area. It's part of what the planning process does. That these things were mentioned in the report for this particular project means absolutely nothing.

https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/idoxWAM/doc...LUME2&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=1

do you want to have a guess who lives in the houses in the 'adjacent conservation area'?

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Or to arrange funding for immediate temporary accommodation, or start working to open up housing stock in the borough for residents, or guarantee funding for a rebuild, or alter legislation to allow councils to do it themselves, or a million other things that the useless fuck will completely avoid by saying 'lessons will be learned'.

Yep: she could have done what a normal human being would do; go there, speak with those affected, sob your fucking heart out and then, as she is the fucking Prime Minister, she could do everything that needs doing to help those affected and ensure this never happens again.

Instead it will be lessons learned and inquiries set up to ensure the guilty go unpunished, a slight dent in their profits their only censure.

 

[bimble]

That article in the mirror if you read it says at the end that the cladding was added for reasons to do with heating insulation and something about it being necessary in relation to a new window system to improve ventilation.
There is plenty here without having to claim that the cladding was the culprit and was only added for the sake of the posh neighbours.

 

[gawkrodger]

May has just ordered a full public inquiry (not that she had much option).

Labour beginning to go in quite hard on this.

'Unforgivable': local Labour MP vents fury over Grenfell Tower fire

Also, I assume many have seen it, but a demo has been called this Friday, 6pm at the
Department for Communities and Local Government

 

[likesfish]

The uni I worked at had a team going round testing fire guiltonie like things that in the event of a fire slam down blocking cable ducts so they cant spread fire.

They had to drill and cut holes to gain access to several to test even though leave area free for access was stickered on several of the ducts when they cut through a celing and insulation to reach the duct

 

[mauvais]

Assessing the whole building strategy is absolutely definitely part of the normal building regs process.

Probably not for anyone doing the work though. So you rely on some kind of joined up assessment at a level between 'this panel' and 'this building', all the interaction between components, small and large.

 

[hash tag]

Is May's inquiry after Khan's, in addition to or confirming his?
From memory, THE Bishops Avenue has a few big houses in it, many of which have been empty for years. The could easily be used as accomodation for those who have lost their homes. They should be exempted from council tax, if applicable for at least a year; they will all have lost just about everything

 

[Artaxerxes]

Corbyn has been shaking hands and telling the community we'll find out who and why this happened.

May has been quietly touring the site speaking to the top nobs of the emergency services.


Bit of a contrast.

 

[Pickman's model]

That article in the mirror if you read it says at the end that the cladding was added for reasons to do with heating insulation and something about it being necessary in relation to a new window system to improve ventilation.
There is plenty here without having to claim that the cladding was the culprit and was only added for the sake of the posh neighbours.

 

[teuchter]

View attachment 109398
https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/idoxWAM/doc...LUME2&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=1

do you want to have a guess who lives in the houses in the 'adjacent conservation area'?

Any building which will have an impact on a conservation area will be assessed in this way. It's assessed because of the existence of the conservation area, not because of who lives in the conservation area. If such an assessment was not made, the planning officer would not be doing their job according to planning legislation. Do you have an objection to the basic principle of conservation areas?

 

[Orang Utan]

May has just ordered a full public inquiry (not that she had much option).

Khan has also announced this, saying it will be an independent inquiry. Though, in the past public inquiries haven't appeared to be that independent, as they tend to be led by members of the upper house.

 

[Pickman's model]

Any building which will have an impact on a conservation area will be assessed in this way. It's assessed because of the existence of the conservation area, not because of who lives in the conservation area. If such an assessment was not made, the planning officer would not be doing their job according to planning legislation. Do you have an objection to the basic principle of conservation areas?

i'll take that as a 'no' then

 

[Sprocket.]

I have an objection to the needless, horrific deaths of innocent people.

 

[teuchter]

i'll take that as a 'no' then

Do you have an objection to the basic principle of conservation areas?

 

[Sprocket.]

Announcing a public inquiry just gives those responsible more shredding time and the opportunity to apply for Barbadian passports.

 

[Pickman's model]

Khan has also announced this, saying it will be an independent inquiry. Though, in the past public inquiries haven't appeared to be that independent, as they tend to be led by members of the upper house.

perhaps a greater objection might be that the terms of reference so often preclude a genuine investigation.

 

[bi0boy]

Even the presenter, Nihal, on Radio 5 Live atm (I know, what am I doing listening to 5Live when football isn't on) is openly asking what's wrong with this country if we don't look after people, if this just about money what does that say about us.

He's was doing similar just now, thought he was a campaigner at first, you don't normally get a Beeb host journo being so forthright.

 

[Pickman's model]

Do you have an objection to the basic principle of conservation areas?

don't answer a question with a question, it makes you look feeble.

 

[Callie]

Any building which will have an impact on a conservation area will be assessed in this way.

and the impact in this case is purely the view from the conservation area? when did that area become a conservation area and did the block exist before then? Im not really sure where to find this info out?


eta:
ladbrooke cons area existed prior to the block being built (1969 vs 1974 i think)

so the conservation area could raise objections based on appearance but would those outweigh anything that was considered essential for H&S reasons - surely that is unlikely?

 

[teuchter]

don't answer a question with a question, it makes you look feeble.

There's no need for me to answer your rhetorical question. It's West London, of course rich people are going to be living in the conservation area. My point is that that's not the reason the views from the conservation area were assessed in the planning report, as you, and crap tabloid journalists, are concluding on account of ignorance about how the planning system works.

 

[Pickman's model]

There's no need for me to answer your rhetorical question. It's West London, of course rich people are going to be living in the conservation area. My point is that that's not the reason the views from the conservation area were assessed in the planning report, as you, and crap tabloid journalists, are concluding on account of ignorance about how the planning system works.

if that is the case then let me remind you that the block was built 43 years ago. it had the same appearance until 2016. seems to me that it's not me who you should be taking to task, but the royal borough of kensington and chelsea who, for 42 years, did not so take the appearance of the block from the nearby conservation areas into account.

 

[mauvais]

Do you have an objection to the basic principle of conservation areas?

Your whole approach to this is a bit odd in itself, and is certainly back-to-front. Go back to the fundamentals. They weren't compelled to spend ten million quid on upgrades because of a conservation area, they were compelled to throw some supporting blurb about conservation into an existing project because that's how planning works.

Apart perhaps from media misinterpretation, all of this is an aside - what the motivation for the project was is still open to debate.

 

[teuchter]

and the impact in this case is purely the view from the conservation area? when did that area become a conservation area and did the block exist before then? Im not really sure where to find this info out?

In any planning process, the external appearance of the building will be assessed, whether or not it is in or near a conservation area. The idea of conservation areas is to particularly protect certain areas because the buildings are of particular merit, or they are a rare surviving example of a certain type of development, or have some other historical significance. In these areas particular emphasis is given to the visual impact of new development on the particular characteristics which that conservation area is intended to protect.

The information about when the conservation area was designated will be somewhere on the council website, I imagine.

 

[Wilf]

In any planning process, the external appearance of the building will be assessed, whether or not it is in or near a conservation area. The idea of conservation areas is to particularly protect certain areas because the buildings are of particular merit, or they are a rare surviving example of a certain type of development, or have some other historical significance. In these areas particular emphasis is given to the visual impact of new development on the particular characteristics which that conservation area is intended to protect.

The information about when the conservation area was designated will be somewhere on the council website, I imagine.

You seem to be forgetting Pickman's point, that the building had already been there for 4 decades.

 

[DotCommunist]

Your whole approach to this is a bit odd in itself

He really really doesn't want it linked to gentrification, the rich/poor divide in london or any of that political side of things.

 

[Pickman's model]

In any planning process, the external appearance of the building will be assessed, whether or not it is in or near a conservation area. The idea of conservation areas is to particularly protect certain areas because the buildings are of particular merit, or they are a rare surviving example of a certain type of development, or have some other historical significance. In these areas particular emphasis is given to the visual impact of new development on the particular characteristics which that conservation area is intended to protect.

The information about when the conservation area was designated will be somewhere on the council website, I imagine.

avondale a few years back Avondale Conservation Area
ladbroke conservation area, various dates 1969-2002 https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/pdf/Ladbroke Conservation Area.pdf

 

[teuchter]

if that is the case then let me remind you that the block was built 43 years ago. it had the same appearance until 2016. seems to me that it's not me who you should be taking to task, but the royal borough of kensington and chelsea who, for 42 years, did not so take the appearance of the block from the nearby conservation areas into account.

Planning policy changes over time, as do people's ideas about what is worth preserving and what is good architecture. Lots of these blocks were put up after the war in a rush to provide social housing. They were initially seen as representing progress and an escape from poor quality older housing stock. As their reputation changed, public perception changed and, for example, victorian housing became valued in a way it had not been before. Therefore it became seen as something to protect rather than to get rid of.

The Victorian Society was not formed until the 1950s because befoe then, victorian architecture was not seen as something of aesthetic value.

Likewise, now, some modernist concrete architecture is starting to be seen as worth preserving. There are now conservation areas which seek to protect buildings of that post war era, which were seen as eyesores by many, just 10 or 20 years ago. In fact there recent examples of attempts to save social housing blocks from demolition by using or seeking these new protections.

 

[Dogsauce]

if that is the case then let me remind you that the block was built 43 years ago. it had the same appearance until 2016. seems to me that it's not me who you should be taking to task, but the royal borough of kensington and chelsea who, for 42 years, did not so take the appearance of the block from the nearby conservation areas into account.

Cart before the horse here, the works will have been planned and then consideration of the impact to the conservation area will have taken place after application put in to plannning, nothing points to the work having been planned primarily for the benefit of the neighbour's view (although 'smartening up' the appearance of blocks like this is seen as desirable, but happens everywhere, not just in expensive areas).

This is usual planning stuff, there is a standard list of impacts that Development Control will pick from and apply to any scheme as necessary.

I seriously doubt there is anything to go at here with regards to the motivation for the refurbishment, despite the click baity independent article. There's plenty of other credible things to hang them for, better focusing on them.

(Edited to add: There may be valid criticism of this being the kind of 'grand scheme' that local authorities like, as external refurbishments are a very visual example of progress and renewal, good for posing in front of for the local rag come election time, whereas sticking in sprinklers wouldn't be a recognisable change to most people. That's part of a general problem with local politics, especially when cash is limited - things are done that look like things being done, not necessarily the most beneficial)

 

[Steel Icarus]

First question: Why didn't you talk to residents?
Answer: Two minutes of fucking waffle with no answer to the question
Fucking robot
London fire: Seventeen dead after blaze engulfs tower block - BBC News

 

[teuchter]

Your whole approach to this is a bit odd in itself, and is certainly back-to-front. Go back to the fundamentals. They weren't compelled to spend ten million quid on upgrades because of a conservation area, they were compelled to throw some supporting blurb about conservation into an existing project because that's how planning works.

Apart perhaps from media misinterpretation, all of this is an aside - what the motivation for the project was is still open to debate.

I'd like the causes of this disaster to be discussed based on fact rather than people's attempts to fit it into their own political narratives based on misinformation or willful misunderstanding.

As a consequence the usual people will pop up to say this means I don't care about the political aspects, or am a promoter of gentrification, or whatever. Yawn.